videocache-catalogue

VIDEO
CACHE
VIDEO CACHE is a screening comprised of ten works from the original SAW Video Mediatheque, which were
accessible online from 2003 until 2009. Curated by SAW Video Director, Penny McCann, the works are
presented here in a renewed context–in full quality–to a small audience in Montréal, approximately one
year after the Mediatheque’s server crash.
VIDEO CACHE is also an online showcase, available at wayward.ca/videocache from November 24th 2010, until
December 24th, 2010. Online, the videos are framed by numerous contextualizing documents in the form
of academic articles and videos created during the development and launch of the Mediatheque, at SAW
Video. wayward.ca is a project by Mél Hogan and Nikki Forrest, discussed in dialogue format at the end of
this catalogue. wayward.ca is Mél Hogan’s doctoral research creation play space and Nikki Forrest’s experimental playground for situating art in relation to the web.
VIDEO CACHE is initiated by Mél Hogan (with the help of Nikki Forrest), curated by Penny McCann, and
facilitated and sponsored by GIV.
Penny McCann
Pour le visionnement VIDEO CACHE, ma tâche à titre de Commissaire fut de sélectionner dix oeuvres parmi les 486
vidéos de la collection Médiathèque de SAW Video. Les dix oeuvres sélectionnées pour VIDEO CACHE représentent
autant l’esprit que la diversité de la Médiathèque : des vidéos indépendantes et des vidéos canadiennes dont la plupart proviennent de la région d’Ottawa-Gatineau.
Un bref historique de la Médiathèque
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
MOT DE LA COMMISSAIRE
VIDEO CACHE
Financée par le ministère du Patrimoine canadien et le Conseil des Arts du Canada, la Médiathèque fut créée par
SAW Video en 2003. Le but recherché de ce projet était de promouvoir gratuitement l’échange entre artistes sur le
web, et faciliter le visionnement en ligne d’oeuvres complètes en format vidéo. Pour obtenir les oeuvres, SAW Video lança un appel aux artistes de la région d’Ottawa-Gatineau ainsi qu’aux centres d’arts médiatiques canadiens.
Un cachet de 200 $ par vidéo fut versé aux artistes pour une diffusion d’une durée de trois ans sur le site de la
Médiathèque. En tant qu’artiste participante à cette demande de la Médiathèque, je me souviens de la course–vu le
court délai prescript–pour soumettre des vidéos dans le cadre de ce projet afin d’être rémunéré. Les artistes pouvaient ainsi soumettre jusqu’à douze oeuvres, tandis que la limite pour les centres d’artistes était de dix oeuvres.
Quelques artistes non affiliés à SAW Video ont aussi soumis des oeuvres. Par ailleurs, les onze centres d’artistes
suivants ont répondu à l’appel lancé par la Médiathèque : Independent Filmmakers’ Cooperative d’Ottawa,
Daimon (Gatineau), Vidéographe (Montréal), Vidéo Femmes (Québec), Spirafilm (Québec), Charles Street Video
(Toronto), Quickdraw Animation Society (Calgary), Cineworks (Vancouver), Video Out (Vancouver), Ed Video (Guelph) et Groupe Intervention Video (Montréal). L’ensemble de cette contribution a permis d’atteindre
l’objectif de SAW Video et de constituer, en fin de compte, une impressionnante collection de 486 films dans la
base de données de SAW Video.[1]
Le choix des dix oeuvres
La Médiathèque offre une grande sélection de vidéos d’art indépendantes–si grande qu’il ne fut pas facile de restreindre le choix à dix vidéos representatives. On se rappellera que plusieurs des vidéos furent créées dans les
années précédant le lancement de la Médiathèque en 2003. Ces années furent une période intense de création
médiatique due à la disponibilité des systèmes de montage non-linéaire à SAW Video dès 1997.
Dans le cadre de ce projet, les oeuvres suivantes ont été sélectionnées, en premier lieu : Damn Near Killed Him (1997)
par Tony Asimakopoulos, et Beacon (1999) par Eric Walker, parce que ces artistes étaient les plus reconnus à
l’époque.
Par la suite, Hyperemotional (2000) par Riley Rempel, et Mr. Roger’s Vacation (1998) par Jacob Hanna et Ryan Stec ont
été produits lors d’un programme de formation pour les jeunes à SAW Video qui a connu un grand success entre
1998 et 2006.
Pour illustrer cette période particulièrment prolifique à SAW Video, j’ai retenu la vidéo Emballage (1999) par Tim
Dallett, Phil Rose et Thomas McIntosh. Créée en 1999, la vidéo Emballage capte bien l’esprit multidisciplinaire
de la Galerie SAW Video.[2] Enfin, j’ai retenu la vidéo X (trace) (2002) de Phil Rose afin de rappeler cette période
importante de développement de SAW Video.
J’ai aussi choisi d’inclure dans le palmarès, Teleculture, the Teleculture (1982) de Chris Mullington. Bien que la Médiathèque ne soit pas directement liée aux archives de SAW Video, quelques-unes des oeuvres sur le site nous
ramènent aux premiers jours de la production vidéo à Ottawa. Le travail de Mullington est l’une des rares oeuvres
produite dans les années 1980 à SAW Video.
Finalement pour atteindre notre objectif de dix vidéos, j’ai aussi retenu trois oeuvres provenant des centres
d’artistes : Fire and Ice par Dan Sokolowski (1998) de l’Independent Filmmakers’ Cooperative d’Ottawa ; ASK‐ME
(1993) de Carol Beecher, de Quickdraw Animation Society à Calgary ; et Hello Ingmar de Gunilla Josephson, oeuvre
provenant de Charles Street Video.
Les hauts, les bas et le futur de la Médiathèque
La Médiathèque a continué son travail de sélection d’art juqu’en mai 2009, soit jusqu’à la perte inexpliquée de
données sur le site web de la Médiathèque. Suite à cet événement désastreux, la direction de SAW Video a choisi
de ne pas réinvestir des argents dans la recréation de la base de données mais plutôt de concevoir à l’aide de la
technologie un nouveau site web pour la Médiathèque. Le nouveau site web est presque complété et la nouvelle
version devrait être lancée au début de l’année 2011, ce qui devrait permettre à SAW Video de reprendre sa place
dans le monde artistique.
Penny McCann,
Directrice de SAW Video
[1] Le nombre d’oeuvres
disponibles sur le site a
été réduit en 2006 suite
à l’expiration du contrat
de trois ans. En 2006, les
artistes furent contactés
à nouveau et la majorité
d’entre eux ont consenti à
ce que leurs oeuvres demeurent sur le site–soit 300
sur 486. Des oeuvres additionnelles, provenant de
membres SAW Video, furent
aussi ajoutées en 2004, ce
qui augmenta le nombre
d’oeures disponibles sur le
site à 325.
[2] SAW Video est devenue
une corporation distincte
en 2001. Les deux SAW
opérent présentement
comme deux organisations
indépendantes: la Galerie
SAW et l’association SAW
Video.
Penny McCann
For this VIDEO CACHE programme, my task as curator was to select ten works from the 486 works included in SAW
Video’s Mediatheque media art web streaming project. Collectively the works selected represent the composition and spirit of the Mediatheque–independent, Canadian, with the large majority of the work–75%–from the
Ottawa-Gatineau region.
A quick history of the Mediatheque
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
CURATORIAL STATEMENT
VIDEO CACHE
Funded by the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Canada Council for the Arts, SAW Video’s Independents
Online media art streaming project (later, the Mediatheque) was created in 2003 with the aim of fostering an online community of media artists through streaming full-length films and videos. To solicit work, SAW Video put
out an open call to artists in the Ottawa-Gatineau region as well as to media art centres from across the country.
An artist fee of $200 per work was paid for rights to stream works for three years, with individuals and centres
limited to twelve and ten works respectively. In all, eleven media art centres from across Canada contributed
work: the Independent Filmmakers’ Cooperative of Ottawa, Daimon (Gatineau), Vidéographe (Montréal), Vidéo
Femmes (Québec), Spirafilm (Québec), Charles Street Video (Toronto), Quickdraw Animation Society (Calgary),
Cineworks (Vancouver), Video Out (Vancouver), Ed Video (Guelph,) and Groupe Intervention Video (Montreal).
A handful of individual artists outside the region, and not affiliated with media art centres, also submitted work.
As an artist with work on the site, I recall the headlong rush by Ottawa media artists to get their work on the site
… and be paid for it! SAW Video’s goal was to acquire 500 works and–by the time of launch–an impressive 486
films and videos were included in the database. [1]
The Chosen Ten
With so many works to choose from, for this programme I selected works that could also stand in for other works
on the site. Many of the works date from the seven years immediately preceding the Mediatheque’s creation, in
2003. Interestingly, these years coincide with artists’ initial access to non-linear editing systems, such as those
acquired by SAW Video in 1997, an advent that triggered an increase in artistic production at the centre. Several
of the selected works were made during this highly productive time at SAW Video: Damn Near Killed Him (1997) by
Tony Asimakopoulos, and Beacon (1999) by Eric Walker, represent work produced by more established artists
working at SAW Video at the time.
Hyperemotional (2000) by Riley Rempel, and Mr. Roger’s Vacation (1998) by Jacob Hanna and Ryan Stec, were products
of SAW Video’s youth programme, a highly successful video training programme that ran from 1998–2006.
Emballage (1999) by Tim Dallett, Phil Rose and Thomas McIntosh, also dates from this particularly prolific time at
SAW Video. This performance-video captures the spirit of the multi-disciplinary centre, Galerie SAW Video, that
existed from 1988-2001. [2] Phil Rose’s X (trace) (2002) is the most recent piece included in this selection.
Although SAW Video’s Mediatheque does not have a direct relationship to SAW Video’s tape archive–a collection
that is now entering its 30th year–some of the works on the site, such as Chris Mullington’s Teleculture, the Tele‐
culture (1982), hearken back to the early days of video production in Ottawa. Mullington’s video is one of the few
works from the 1980’s in the Mediatheque.
The contribution of works by other centres is represented by Fire and Ice (1998) by Dan Sokolowski, from the
Independent Filmmakers’ Cooperative of Ottawa; ASK‐ME (1993) by Carol Beecher, from Quickdraw Animation
Society in Calgary; and Gunilla Josephson’s Hello Ingmar (2000), which was one of several works contributed to the
site by Charles Street Video.
[1] The number of works
on the site was reduced in
2006 due to expiration of
artists’ three-year streaming contracts. In 2006, a
contract renewal request
was sent to all artists with
work on the site. The majority of artists consented,
resulting in almost 300
works of the original 486
remaining on the site.
Additional works from SAW
Video members were also
added since 2004, bringing
the current number of works
on the site to 325.
[2] SAW Video became a
separately incorporated
organization in 2001. The
two SAWs now operate as
The Fall and Rise of the Mediatheque
two separate organizations,
SAW Video’s Mediatheque continued streaming media art until May 2009, when the site suffered a disastrous Galerie SAW Gallery and
failure of its backend database. At that point, rather than incur the expenses necessary to resurrect the site, SAW SAW Video Association.
Video elected to revamp the now technologically outdated Mediatheque into a newly redesigned website for the
centre, with updated web streaming technology and a new aesthetic. The website redesign is currently nearing
completion and the new Mediatheque will be launched in early 2011; an event that will begin a new chapter in SAW
Video’s media art streaming initiative.
Penny McCann,
SAW Video, Director
ASK‐ME
Carol Beecher
(2:10)
ASK‐ME is an experimental cameraless animation piece etched directly on 16mm black leader,
with the addition of colour using permanent markers.
1993
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
Not sure if she was going to be a theatre technician or an animator, Beecher!"#$%&'!&()*&%!+,-!.*&/'!
*,0&!)1!2&!,3!,%)(.)!"%.)4!.1!.*&!+&3)!)1!)*&!562&%),!7166&#&!18!5%)!9!:&.(#34!#%,'$,)(3#!(3!;<=>?!@&%!
"%.)!"6A4!,3!&BC&%(A&3),6!D,A&%,6&..!"6A!E&)D*&'!13!;FAA!"6A!.)1DGH4!ASK‐ME, was nominated for
I&.)!JBC&%(A&3),6!K(6A!,)!)*&!L1%G)13!M*1%)!K(6A!,3'!N('&1!K&.)(0,6!(3!;<<F!,3'!%&D&(0&'!,!:(%&D)1%/.!
7(),)(13!,)!)*&!;<<>!I6,DG!O,%(,!K(6APN('&1!K&.)(0,6!(3!Q&+!R&%.&-?!M*&!*13&'!*&%!,'A(3(.)%,)(13!,3'!
communication skills as Operations Coordinator of the Quickdraw Animation Society, and oversaw the
development of the organization from an animation fan club into an internationally recognized independent production, resource, and education centre for all forms of animation. With her partner Kevin D.A.
S$%-)3(G!)*&-!C%1'$D&'!O%?!T&,C&%/.!T&,66-!I,'!O1%3(3#!(3!UVVW4!,!;>!A(3$)&!"6A!,21$)!)*&!$3&,.-!
co-existence between life and Mr. Death. Released on 35mm it has toured the world at festivals, winning
the Bronze Award at the Kalamazoo International Animation Festival. They have just completed a comA(..(13&'!"6A4!I$.(3&..!,.!X.$,64!81%!53(A,.(01!53(A,)(13!K1%$A!18!)*&!K&.)(0,6!'&!O&B(D1!,3' Beecher
is currently wrangling a bunch of creatures from the planet Zig 5 with her pencil for the Intergalactic
Y*1/.!Y*1!.D(&3D&!"D)(13!(3)&%.)()(,6!.&%(&.?
VIDEO CACHE
q
Mr. Rogers’ Vacation
Jake Hanna/Ryan Stec
(3:20)
R,G& Hanna!(.!,3!Z)),+,P2,.&'!0('&1!,%)(.)!+*1!*,.!2&&3!*&,0(6-!(30160&'!(3!)*&!)&D*3161#(D,6!D13"#$%,)(13.!18!M5Y!N('&1!81%!10&%!;V!-&,%.?!@(.!+1%G!.C,3.!)*&!#,A$)!18!.C&D),D6&!8%1A!D1AA&%D(,6!C%1'$D)(13.!
)1!,%)!*1$.&!&BC&%(A&3),)(13?!7$%%&3)6-!R,G&!*,.!2&&3!81D$.&'!13!$.(3#!0('&1!,.!,!)116!18!.1D(,6!D1AA$3(D,)(13!+()*!,!0,%(&)-!18!313!C%1")!,3'!313!#10&%3A&3)!1%#,3([,)(13.?
Ryan Stec is a media artist and producer whose work experience and community involvement spans a wide
0,%(&)-!18!'(.D(C6(3&.!,3'!(3)&%&.).?!@&!*,.!2&&3!*&,0(6-!(30160&'!(3!D$))(3#!&'#&!D$6)$%,6!C%1'$D)(13!(3!
Z)),+,!.(3D&!;<<=?!@&!(.!D$%%&3)6-!)*&!5%)(.)(D!:(%&D)1%!18!5%)&3#(3&?
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
n
1998
VIDEO CACHE
Using the plainness of Mr. Roger’s to juxtapose the fantastical journey into a dream world of
colour and rhythm, this piece takes the viewer away from tension and angst, and leads them
through a pleasant emotional vacation built on the light and flowing colours of the piece.
Something to think about.
Hyperemotional
Riley Rempel
(2:26)
Riley Rempel!+,.!21%3!(3!Z,G!\,%G!]66(31(.!13!R,3$,%-!;>4!;<UU?!Rempel!+,.!)*&!"%.)!+1A,3!&0&%!)1!
receive an Emmy for game show hosting. She is passionate about cheesecake, her real-life hero is Charles
Darwin, and she thinks Facebook is a huge waste of time. You can visit her website at rileyrempel.com.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
e
2000
VIDEO CACHE
Hyperemotional is what happens when SAW Video gives a musician a microphone, a camera,
and some free editing time. Rempel went in with no plan other than to make a music video for
a song that didn’t exist yet – which, in retrospect, wasn’t much of a plan. The footage was
shot in the Avid editing suite over the course of two overnight shifts and the video built on
itself as the song took shape. It was a weird experiment that turned out pretty well.
Fire and Ice
Dan Sokolowski
(2:43)
1998
A documentary on the 1998 ice storm.
Sokolowski/.!"6A.!*,0&!2&&3!.*1+3!,)!A,3-!"6A!8&.)(0,6.!,3'!"6A!&0&3).!61D,66-4!3,)(13,66-!,3'!(3)&%nationally and has received grants from the Canada Council, Ontario Arts Council, CBC, IFCO and the
Klondike Institute of Art and Culture and the Yukon Film and Sound Commission.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
Dan Sokolowski!(.!,!#%,'$,)&!(3!K(3&!5%).!8%1A!)*&!X3(0&%.()-!18!Z)),+,?!@&!D$%%&3)6-!6(0&.!(3!:,+.13!
City, Yukon, where he is the producer of the +++?',+.13"6A8&.)?D1A. Dawson City International Short
K(6A!K&.)(0,6?!@&!*,.!),$#*)!D1$%.&.!(3!;FAA!"6AA,G(3#4!0('&1!C%1'$D)(134!,3(A,)(13!,3'!.)$'(1!,%).?!
@&!+,.!,!21,%'!A&A2&%!18!)*&!]3'&C&3'&3)!K(6AA,G&%.!711C&%,)(0&!18!Z)),+,!E^!-&,%.H!,3'!)*&!7,3,'(,3!K(6A!]3.)()$)&?!@&!(.!D$%%&3)6-!,!A&A2&%!18!)*&!:,+.13!7()-!5%).!M1D(&)-!,3'!)*&!L$G13!K(6A!M1D(&)-?!
VIDEO CACHE
c
Teleculture, the Teleculture
Chris Mullington
(6:43)
One of the founding members of SAW Video, Mullington is an internationally recognized video director, editor and producer whose work is exhibited worldwide, in galleries, festivals and on television and
included in the collections of The National Gallery of Canada, The Canada Council Art Bank, and The
O$.&$A!18!O1'&%3!5%)!(3!Q&+!L1%G?!@(.!#%1$3'2%&,G(3#!E,3'!31+!D6,..(DH!2%1,'D,.)!'&.(#3!+1%G!81%!
_*(.!@1$%!@,.!UU!O(3$)&.!.&)!3&+!2&3D*A,%G.!81%!D1A&'-!(3!,!D1$3)%-!8,A1$.!81%!#%&,)!D1A(D!)&6&0(.(13?!
@&!*,.!+13!3$A&%1$.!7,3,'(,3!,3'!(3)&%3,)(13,6!,+,%'.!81%!*(.!+1%G!(3!0,%(1$.!D,C,D()(&.!(3D6$'(3#!
,!`&A(3(!81%!*(.!D1A&'(D!+1%G!81%!7I7!_N/.!_*&!@&,6)*!M*1+?!Q1+!D%&,)(0&!'(%&D)1%!18!)*&!Z)),+,!
production company, TV Factory, Mullington/.!0('&1!,%)!,&.)*&)(D!*,.!.)%13#6-!(3a$&3D&'!*(.!)&6&0(.(13!
+1%G!+*(D*!*,.!2&&3!+('&6-!8&,)$%&'!13!.$D*!.*1+.!,.!7I7/.!_*(.!@1$%!*,.!UU!O(3$)&.4!_*&!@&,6)*!
Show, and CBC Sunday.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
j
1982
VIDEO CACHE
Willoughby Sharp visited SAW Gallery in 1983. This flamboyant New Yorker was a denizen of Andy Warhol’s Factory scene before becoming a prophet of telecommunications and
satellite technology. He was interviewed by David Peat for CBC Television. Producer Joan
Woodward provided the footage to Mullington. This is an early example of an experiment
with repetition, rescanning and looping of video. The intent was to produce a video structure that worked like music. Interesting to fans of analogue effects.
Emballage
Tim Dallett / Phil Rose / Thomas McIntosh
(3:27)
Tim Dallett has worked in media arts and artist-run centres across Canada for the past two decades as
,3!,%)(.)4!D$%,)1%4!,'A(3(.)%,)1%4!)&D*3(D(,34!+%()&%!,3'!&'$D,)1%?!@(.!+1%G!81D$..&.!13!)*&!%&6,)(13.*(C!
2&)+&&3!%&,6P)(A&!A&'(,!,3'!(3.),66,)(13!&30(%13A&3).?!@&!%&D&(0&'!,3!OK5!8%1A!)*&!Q10,!MD1)(,!(3!
2001. A co-founder of the Artifact Institute, Tim currently lives and works in Montreal.
Thomas McIntosh!.)$'(&'!5%D*()&D)$%&!,)!7,%6&)13!X3(0&%.()-!(3!Z)),+,4!7,3,',!,3'!,)!I&%6(3!_&D*3(D,6! X3(0&%.()-4! `&%A,3-?! @&! *16'.! ,! I,D*&61%! 18! 5%D*()&D)$%&! +()*! *(#*! '(.)(3D)(13! 8%1A! 7,%6&)13!
X3(0&%.()-?!_*%1$#*!)*&!.)$'-!18!,%D*()&D)$%&!*&!'&0&61C&'!,3!(3)&%&.)!(3!)*&!,.C&D).!18!1$%!C*-.(D,6!
environment which affect our perception - in the point of cross-over between experience and architecture.
It is the exploration of this relationship, which he believes to be key to the question of architecture, which
6&'!*(A!)1!81%A!b_*&!X.&%c!(3!D166,21%,)(13!+()*!JAA,3$&6!O,',3?
Phil Rose!.C&3'.!*(.!)(A&!2&)+&&3!0(.$,6!,%)!P!6(#*)21B&.!+*(D*!A,G&!$.&!18!16'!;FAA!"6A!P!,3'!13#1(3#!"6A!,3'!0('&1!C%1d&D).4!,.!+&66!,.!)%-(3#!)1!"3'!)*&!,3.+&%!)1!.$D*!+&(#*)-!e$&.)(13.!,.!+*-!T,-!
\,%61$%!D,3/)!"3'!)*&!2,DG!18!#1,6!,!2()!A1%&!18)&3?!@&!D$%%&3)6-!+1%G.!,)!7&3)%&!'&!\%1'$D)(13!:,(A13!
in Gatineau.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
a
1999
VIDEO CACHE
This video-performance recording draws out and magnifies the phenomena produced by
physical gestures. Emballage captures the spirit of “live architecture” by intensively documenting the work of two performers building a structure out of stacking chairs and industrial packaging. Image and sound are recorded live in camera without overdubs, creating a
syncopated audio-visual flux that carries the viewer through the arc of the performance. A
version of the work was presented as a live performance as part of the Detonator performance art festival at SAW Gallery, in 2000. Emballage was included in the screening SAW
Video: A Quarter Century, curated in 2006 by Caroline Langill.
Beacon
Eric Walker
(4:47)
With hypnotic image loops and squelching radio noise, BEACON is a fast meditation on microwave relay towers and urban landscape.
1999
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
Painter and video artist Eric Walker!+,.!21%3!(3!@,6(8,B4!Q10,!MD1)(,!(3!;<^>?!@&!.)$'(&'!,)!)*&!Q10,!
MD1)(,!7166&#&!18!5%)!,3'!:&.(#3!,3'!2&#,3!&B*(2()(3#!(3!;<=U!+()*!,!#%,'$,)(13!.*1+!,)!)*&!533,!
f&131+&3/.!`,66&%-!EQM75:H4!@,6(8,B?!!@&!*,.!D13)(3$&'!)1!+1%G!,3'!&B*(2()!C%(A,%(6-!(3!)*&!$3(0&%.()-!
/regional art gallery/artist run scene for over two decades. Walker has received numerous awards and
grants for his artwork, including “A” grants from the Canada Council for the Arts as well as awards from
the Ontario Arts Council, the Conseil des arts et des lettres de Quebec, and the City of Ottawa. Walker’s
works are widely held in public collections including the Canada Council Art Bank, The Ottawa Art
Gallery, the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia, The Art Gallery of Newfoundland and Labrador, The Owens
5%)!`,66&%-!EO1$3)!566(.13!X3(0&%.()-H4!:,6*1$.(&!X3(0&%.()-!5%)!`,66&%-!E@,6(8,BH4!,3'!)*&!7()-!18!Z)tawa. Walker has exhibited his work widely in Canada, with international representation in group shows
(3!\16,3'!E;<=>H4!O&B(D1!EUVV;H4!,3'!Q&+!L1%G!EUVV=H!,.!+&66!,.!.161!&B*(2()(13.!,)!)*&!7,3,'(,3!
JA2,..-!(3!_1G-1!EUVVUH4!)*&!Z)),+,!5%)!`,66&%-!EUVV^H4!)*&!M1$)*&%3!562&%),!5%)!`,66&%-!EUVV^H4!
,3'!)*&!7138&'&%,)(13!7&3)%&!81%!)*&!5%).!EUVVFH?!Y,6G&%!6(0&.!(3!Z)),+,?
VIDEO CACHE
o
Damn Near Killed Him
Tony Asimakopoulos
(8:08)
1997
Tony Asimakopoulos?! ;<F<P;<=^g! G('h! ;<=FPUV;Vg! "6AA,G&%?! Q1)&+1%)*-! .*1%).g! R(AA-! K(3#&%.4!
;<<;?!O,A,/.!I1-4!;<<U?!Damn Near Killed Him4!;<<=4!Q(#*)!18!)*&!7&6(2,)&4!UVVV?!Y%1)&!,3'!'(%&D)&'!
)*&!8&,)$%&!@1%.(&/.!T&)%&,)!,)!)*&!7,3,'(,3!K(6A!7&3)%&!(3!UVVW?!7$%%&3)6-!6(0&.!(3!O13)%&,64!+*&%&!
*&!(.!D1AC6&)(3#!K1%)$3,)&!M13!E+1%G(3#!)()6&H4!,3!,$)12(1#%,C*(D,6!8&,)$%&!'1D$A&3),%-4!C%1'$D&'!2-!
EyeSteelFilm.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
c
VIDEO CACHE
A poetic montage of images from films Asimakopoulos made years ago, revisiting violence
and transgression in the form of a confession and prayer. A hit-and-run outburst of dreamy
melodrama within a rant within a mystery all wrapped up inside a longing for God.
(X) Trace
Phil Rose
(10:49)
Phil Rose!.C&3'.!*(.!)(A&!2&)+&&3!0(.$,6!,%)i6(#*)21B&.!+*(D*!A,G&!$.&!18!16'!;FAA!"6Ai,3'!13#1(3#!"6A!,3'!0('&1!C%1d&D).4!,.!+&66!,.!)%-(3#!)1!"3'!)*&!,3.+&%!)1!.$D*!+&(#*)-!e$&.)(13.!,.!+*-!T,-!
\,%61$%!D,3/)!"3'!)*&!2,DG!18!#1,6!,!2()!A1%&!18)&3?!@&!D$%%&3)6-!+1%G.!,)!7&3)%&!'&!\%1'$D)(13!:,(A13!
in Gatineau.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
a
2002
VIDEO CACHE
The title is meant to be read as “times trace”–as a kind of pseudo-mathematical formula–
“X” being the multiplication sign and “trace” that which is multiplied. A play on words is
also intended–“time’s trace”–suggestion, obliquely, a multiplication of small instances, an
accumulation of traces, residue even, of the subject, resulting in multiplicity–not just a
single instance, not a summing up of the subject; but rather an evolving and fluid subject,
through fleeting glimpses and extended moments of different shades of the subject as time,
and the manipulations of the image’s surface, act upon. Although Rose’s intention was for this
process to result in a certain degree of abstraction and ambiguity, Rose felt that this treatment would illuminate aspects of the subject, and convey the entire experience in a direct
and visceral manner.
Hello Ingmar
Gunilla Josephson
(7:36)
d
Gunilla Josephson is a Swedish-born artist, based in Toronto. She holds a BA in Social Sciences from
M)1DG*16A!X3(0&%.()-!,3'!,!OK5!8%1A!)*&!7166&#&!18!5%)!,3'!:&.(#3!ES13.)8,DG.G16,3H4!M)1DG*16A?!
@&%!0('&1.!*,0&!2&&3!&B*(2()&'!&B)&3.(0&6-!)*%1$#*1$)!7,3,',!,3'!(3)&%3,)(13,66-4!A1.)!31),26-!,)!)*&!
Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal, the Southern Alberta Art Gallery, the Winnipeg Art Gallery,
M5Y!N('&1!EZ)),+,H4!7(3&A,)*&e$&!Z3),%(1!E_1%13)1H4!\6&,.$%&!:1A&!E_1%13)1H4!I(1!T(1!EM)1DG*16AH4!
the International Short Film Festival Oberhausen, the Canadian Cultural Centre in Paris, the Swed(.*!7$6)$%&!7&3)%&!(3!\,%(.4!S,..&6!:1G$A&3),%"6A!j!N('&18&.)4!,3'!fXk!Ef13'134!XSH?!_*&!]A,#&.!
K&.)(0,6!*,.!C%&.&3)&'!*&%!+1%G!13!3$A&%1$.!1DD,.(13.!E(3!&,D*!8&.)(0,6!8%1A!UVVV!)1!UVVWH?!Josephson
was awarded the Canada Council Paris Studio residency in 2003 and has been an artist in residence at
7(%D161!MD,3'(3,0(1!ET1A&H4!)*&!`$.*$6!M)$'(1!EI6,(%A1%&4!562&%),H4!)*&!Q1%'(D!5%).!7&3)%&!EI&%#&34!
Q1%+,-H4!,3'!7*,%6&.!M)%&&)!N('&1!E_1%13)1H?!!`$3(66,!Josephson/.!+1%G!(.!'(.)%(2$)&'!2-!N),C&!E_1%13)1H!
,3'!K(6A81%A!EM)1DG*16AH?
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
All of Josephson’s work deals with possible pasts and fictional histories from an entirely subjective point of view with a complete disregard for historical facts with the intent of reimagining and re-assessing the narratives of the past. Her true interest lies in voicing ideas
about the interstices between art and reality, between truth and fiction.
2000
VIDEO CACHE
For three decades he stood at the dizzing heights of world kino, his name synonymous with
the term art movie. But who would ever imagine finding a home in Ingmar Bergman’s psycho-nightmares? Gunilla, that’s who. Cast as a bit player in his unknown 1963 effort Virgin
Belief and Double Moral, Gunilla travels the imagescape of Bergman’s flicks, stopping its
troubled interlocuters to ask whether they’d seen her pass this way or not. In the original she
actually has a speaking part, which consisted of this one line: “Hello Ingmar, all my tanks
were knocked out and the roads were impassible.”
Mél Hogan
Ce qui est étonnant n’est pas que les médias numériques s’atténuent, mais qu’ils
demeurent–et que nous demeurons–rivés à nos écrans alors que cet éphémèralité persiste.
Y&3'-!@$(!S-13#!7*$3!l!_*&!:(#(),6!JC*&A&%,6!EUVV=H
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
MISE EN CONTEXTE
VIDEO CACHE
VIDEO CACHE est un projet de recherche-création.[1] D’une part, ce projet sert à mieux supporter la Médiathèque en
rappelant le contexte ayant permis la discussion sur la nécessité de conserver des archives en ligne. D’autre part,
étant donné l’importance de ce projet, VIDEO CACHE est devenue une occasion pour moi de collaborer avec SAW
Video et en particulier avec Madame Penny McCann. Au cours de ce projet, j’ai eu la chance et le grand plaisir de
discuter avec elle de la Médiathèque et nous avons pu échanger sur toutes les questions touchant la Médiathèque
notamment la distribution, l’accès et la préservation de vidéo en ligne. Son expérience et sa perspicacité m’ont été
précieuses dans l’élaboration du projet VIDEO CACHE.
Je suis reconnaissante à plusieurs personnes impliquées dans la conceptualisation et le développement de la Médiathèque à la SAW Video. Un gros merci à Kevin Morris pour sa disponibilité et ses échanges sincères (ancien
coordonnateur du projet Mediatheque et administrateur de la SAW Video), à Anatoly Ignatiev (ancien archiviste
numérique de la Médiathèque), et à Douglas Smalley (ancien technicien de la Médiathèque, agent de préservation
vidéo aux Archives et Bibliothèque Canada). Remerciements à Michael Lechasseur pour ses commentaires sur
mes textes. (Michael Lechasseur a quitté SAW Video un mois seulement avant le lancement de la Médiathèque,
et il est maintenant le technicien web à SAW Video). Le résultat des efforts de toutes ces personnes jumelé avec
le travail de plusieurs artistes, assistants techniques et bénévoles, a permis d’imaginer, de créer et de lancer un
projet d’archivage de vidéos en ligne d’une ampleur sans précédent au Canada. Suite à ces échanges, le projet de
VIDEO CACHE est né. J’ai proposé, à la Directrice de SAW Video, Madame Penny McCann, en titre de Commissaire,
de programmer une soirée projection basée sur les vidéos de la Médiathèque. Le but était de choisir les œuvres
qui représentaient l’historique du projet de développement du portail Médiathèque. Nous avons obtenu des fonds
pour payer les artistes afin de présenter les œuvres retenues dans le projet VIDEO CACHE, de GIV (Groupe Intervention Vidéo).
La projection est accompagnée d’une exposition en ligne à wayward.ca/videocache, pour laquelle les artistes/distributeurs eurent l’option d’y participer dans un contexte actuel. La plate-forme en ligne de wayward.ca/videocache
sert à documenter l’événement, à fournir des matériaux complémentaires (Anatoly Ignatiev avec SAW Dust et Firuz
Daud avec une vidéo conçue pour le lancement de la Médiathèque en 2003) et à poursuivre la discussion de vidéo
sur le web. Dans le cadre de cette discussion, une entrevue avec Nikki Forrest a aussi été ajoutée au catalogue afin
de résumer l’influence du web sur la distribution, et sur sa pratique en tant qu’artiste.
Toutefois, il demeure difficile de suivre le trajet du développement de la Médiathèque depuis la conception du
projet vers la fin des années 1990, de son lancement en 2003 jusqu’à la perte de sa banque de données en 2009 lors
du « crash de son serveur ». L’absence de documentation a créé un vide dans l’histoire de la Médiathèque. Cette
situation illustre bien la problématique de l’archivage en ligne : qui permet d’accéder simultanément au passé, au
présent, et à un espace temporel prédicatif.[2] Bien que la mémoire numérique soit largement conçue comme une
mémoire enregistrée « cache » et qui donc, laisse des traces numériques indélébiles sur le web, c’est le « crash » qui
met en évidence la valeur et la nécessité du maintien de la collection. Reconstruire l’histoire de la Médiathèque à
partir de cette mémoire « cache », ainsi que des entrevues et des nombreux fragments numériques, sert à documenter le projet dans ce qu’il était, ce qu’il est devenu et du potentiel qu’il représente pour le futur. Une approche
qui tient compte de l’importance du « crash » comme symbole–parfois paradoxal–de l’archivage en ligne est utile
pour une compréhension plus entière d’un tel projet. Finalement, pour comprendre l’importance du « crash » on
doit aussi tenir compte de l’impact de la disparation de ces documents sur les personnes responsable de l’archivage
en ligne.
Notes:
[1] Voir: Chapman,
Owen, and Kim Sawchuk.
Research-Creation: intervention, analysis and
“ family resemblances”.
MD(&3D&!M)$'(&.!EK1%)*D1A(3#H?!
Le « cache » symbolise la mémoire de la Médiathèque, qui sert de base et d’inspiration pour le titre : VIDEO CACHE,
où le double sens de « cache » en français est destiné à laisser entendre que les travaux ne sont pas visibles, mais [2] Voir: Rick Prelinger
EUVV=H!14 point Manifesto
qu’ils ne sont pas perdus pour autant.
En juin 2009, Tiffany Tse, la stagiaire d’été de la SAW Video a expédié une lettre aux artistes expliquant les
problèmes techniques de la SAW Video et de la Médiathèque. Le message destiné aux visiteurs du site internet
présentait l’avis suivant : « En raison de circonstances hors de notre contrôle, la Médiathèque sera fermée jusqu’à
nouvel avis. Nous nous excusons pour tout inconvénient. » Ainsi, près d’une décennie après le lancement du site, je
crois que la Médiathèque ne peut renaître comme elle était auparavant et sa ré-création, à l’ère des médias sociaux,
demanderait que l’on porte attention à des concepts entièrement nouveaux.
Parce qu’il existe peu de documentation sur ce projet ou de projets similaires, il devient difficile d’articuler ou de
soutenir les approches proposées par la Médiathèque pour la préservation et distribution de vidéo en ligne. Avec le
développement des médias sociaux, il est logique de penser que les utilisateurs du web se sont fait à l’idée que les
données numériques ne sont accessibles que pour une période limitée.
En conclusion, je crois que ce projet de documentation permet une plus grande compréhension de la nature complexe et souvent paradoxale des archives en ligne et cela và bien au-delà de l’apparente contradiction entre les collections dites matérielles ou immatérielles. Cet exemple du « crash» de la Médiathèque nous aide à comprendre
le concept de l’éphémère durable.[3] Une meilleure compréhension de ce concept est un des apports principal de
cette étude de cas.
On6!@1#,3
online: http://subjecto2d&D)?3&)lUVV=l;;lV<l
on-the-virtues-of-preexisting-material-a-manifesto2-P%(DGPC%&6(3#&%h!!&)!K&6(B!
M),6'&%!EUVV=H!Copyright
dungeons and grey zones
From: nettime-l Digest, Vol
>4!]..$&!;V4!.&3)g!_$&4!;^!
Apr., 2008
[3] N1(%g!Y&3'-!@$(!S-13#!
7*$3!EUVV=H!The Enduring
Ephemeral, or the Future
Is a Memory In: Critical
]3e$(%-!m^!E5$)$A3H!!_*&!
X3(0&%.()-!18!7*(D,#1g!
;W=i;>;?
Mél Hogan
What is surprising is not that digital media fades but rather that it stays at all and that
+&!.),-!)%,3."B&'!2-!1$%!.D%&&3.!,.!().!&C*&A&%,6()-!&3'$%&.?
Y&3'-!@$(!S-13#!7*$3!l!_*&!:(#(),6!JC*&A&%,6!EUVV=H
VIDEO CACHE is a two-fold experiment in research creation;[1] on the one hand it serves to further document the
Mediatheque project by updating the context from which emerges a conversation about what it means to activate
the online archive. On the other hand, it is an entity onto itself. VIDEO CACHE has become an opportunity for me to
collaborate with SAW Video, and in particular Penny McCann, with whom I have had great pleasure in discussing the Mediatheque and all ensuing issues pertaining to online video distribution, access, and preservation. Her
experience, initiative and insight have been invaluable to shaping VIDEO CACHE.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
IN CONTEXT
VIDEO CACHE
I am also grateful for having had the opportunity to exchange with several people implicated in conceptualizing
and developing the Mediatheque at SAW Video. Many thanks for the heartfelt and insightful exchanges with Kevin
Morris (former Project Coordinator and Administrator of SAW Video), Anatoly Ignatiev (Mediatheque Digital
Archivist, and filmmaker), Douglas Smalley (Mediatheque technician, currently LAC/video preservation). And
for the feedback, thank-you to Michael Lechasseur (who had left SAW Video only months prior to the Mediatheque
launch, and is currently SAW Video’s web technician). Together–and with the assistance of other artists, technical assistants and volunteers–this group envisioned, created and launched Canada’s first large-scale online video
archive and portal.
Inspired by these conversations, VIDEO CACHE was born. I proposed to Penny McCann that she curate a screening
based on works from the Mediatheque—the works she felt, as the current director of SAW Video, best represented the project and SAW Video in the years of the portal’s development. Through GIV (Groupe Intervention
Video) we were able to secure screening fees for the artists and a venue to showcase the works. The screening is
accompanied by an online showcase at wayward.ca/videocache, for which artists or distributors were to opt in/out of
the project as a month-long continuation of the Mediatheque’s original context to showcase works online.
The online platform of wayward.ca, shared with video artist Nikki Forrest, serves to document the event, showcase
additional materials, and broaden the discussion of the online realm for video artists. Two videos constitute additional contextualizing material to the project: Anatoly Ignatiev’s SAW Dust and a video created by Firuz Daud for
the launch of the Mediatheque in 2003. An in-depth two-way interview with Nikki Forrest is also included in the
catalogue as part of this ongoing discussion about the web’s hurdles and affordances for video art.
Tracking the Mediatheque project from early discussions in the late 1990s, to its (soft) launch in March 2003, and
then to its database crash in May 2009, the digital (paper) trail links stories, ideals, tensions, troubles, and absences
into the history of the Mediatheque.
The case of the Mediatheque is rare and is important for understanding the manifold locus of the online archive: it
is past, present, and increasingly predictive potential.[2] While it is the ‘cache’ that makes the Mediatheque’s traces
visible and re-visit-able, it is the ‘crash’ that signals its ongoing (archival) value.
Reconstructing the Mediatheque’s story from cached memory and interviews, many scattered digital fragments
serve to document the project—what it was, what it has become, and what future potential it holds. An approach
that accounts for the importance of the ‘crash’ as symbolic of and essential to understanding the paradoxical nature of the online repository as archive—the ‘cache’—is key conceptually in this exploration and documentation
project. I consider the ‘crash’ to represent simultaneously the database of video and the affective let-down of the
project. Similarly, the ‘cache’ symbolizes the memory of the Mediatheque, as distinct from storage, which serves
as the basis and inspiration for the title: VIDEO CACHE, where the double meaning of ‘cache’ in French is intended to
imply that the works are not visible, but not completely lost either.
In June 2009, SAW Video’s summer intern, Tiffany Tse, sent out a letter to video artists regarding the Mediatheque project and more specifically to communicate the ‘going down’ of the site—including both the SAW
Video site and the Mediatheque. However, since this outreach effort, a notice has been posted that diverts users
from the SAW Video website: “Due to circumstances beyond our control, the Mediatheque will be down until further notice. We apologize for any inconvenience.” Perhaps, almost a decade after the launch, into the age of social
media, the Mediatheque cannot exist as it did, and/or its re/creation would pose a different series of tribulations.
Because so little documentation exists about these projects, not much can be done to support new approaches to
video preservation and distribution online: the ‘crashes’ and broken links have come to make a bold statement
about the seemingly inevitable end point of online distribution and display. However, this documentation project serves as a springboard into a larger conversation about the intricate and often paradoxical nature of online
archives—beyond the mere tension between material and immaterial collections. Finally, the Mediatheque also
invariably thwarts utopian visions of the web, while complicating resistance to its growing potential as an archive
and the enduring ephemeral generated brought into evidence through this case study.[3]
On6!@1#,3
Notes:
[1] See: Chapman, Owen,
and Kim Sawchuk.
Research-Creation: intervention, analysis and
“ family resemblances”.
Science Studies
EK1%)*D1A(3#H?
[2] See: Rick Prelinger
EUVV=H!14 point Manifesto
online: http://subjecto2d&D)?3&)lUVV=l;;lV<l
on-the-virtues-of-preexisting-material-a-manifesto2-P%(DGPC%&6(3#&%h!!,3'!K&6(B!
M),6'&%!EUVV=H!Copyright
dungeons and grey zones
From: nettime-l Digest, Vol
>4!]..$&!;V4!.&3)g!_$&4!;^!
Apr., 2008
[3] M&&g!Y&3'-!@$(!S-13#!
7*$3!EUVV=H!The Enduring
Ephemeral, or the Future
Is a Memory In: Critical
]3e$(%-!m^!E5$)$A3H!!_*&!
X3(0&%.()-!18!7*(D,#1g!
;W=i;>;?
SAW Video’s Mediatheque entry portal as archived in the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, circa 2003.
Archive of the SAW Video Mediatheque through the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://sawvideo.com
Nikki Forrest & Mél Hogan
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
WAYWARD CONVERSATION
VIDEO CACHE
\%&.&3)&'!2&61+!,%&!8%,#A&3).!18!,!D130&%.,)(13!2&)+&&3!Q(GG(!K1%%&.)!,3'!On6!@1#,3!)*,)!
took place over the course of the last six months by email. This conversation is reassembled
)1!),G&!13!)*&!81%A!18!,!)+1P+,-!(3)&%0(&+4!%&a&D)(3#!13!,3'!&A&%#(3#!8%1A!)*&(%!D16laboration on various projects at wayward.ca. wayward.ca is a collaborative experimental
online space, for which VIDEO CACHE is the second project, made possible by SAW Video
,3'!`]N?!_*&!"%.)!C%1d&D)4!M\f]Q_JT4!2&#,3!.$AA&%!UV;V!,3'!(.!13P#1(3#!,)!+,-+,%'?
ca/splinter. SPLINTER is a video-art chain letter in circulation by mail and displayed
136(3&?!K$)$%&!C%1d&D).!,%&!(3!)*&!2%,(3.)1%A(3#!C*,.&o!@&%&4!)*&-!'(.D$..!)*&!C6,)81%A4!
projects and philosophical implications of video art in the age of the web. Comments can
be sent to [email protected].
Mél Hogan: How would you define wayward and what we are trying to do?
Nikki Forrest: For me, wayward is an experiment, something that evolves over time starting from shared
interests. The collaborative aspect is especially interesting to me. Curating and programming are specific
activities based on particular sensibilities: knowledge and experience I don’t have. But as an artist, questions around collaboration, dissemination, exchange and research in relation to technology and communication interest me a lot. In this case we are looking specifically at possibilities for archiving, presentation
and exchange online. In terms of history, it’s very interesting that artists’ collectives and artist-run centres
led the way in Canada by establishing exhibition and screening fees for artists, but also with the first online
distribution and showcase projects. I’m interested in looking at this in relation to where we are now. For
the artists who work with video, there are ongoing questions about how/where/when/if to show work in
particular situations—for free in some cases.
MH: Can you tell me in which instances you feel it is interesting to show your work for “free”? Or, let’s
say, if a work is older and has already been paid for through other curated venues, like in the case of VIDEO
CACHE for example, or if a work isn’t picked up by curators… or if a work is too old for the festival circuit
but not old enough to have historical value… are these things you as an artist account for? And I’m wondering—though this might be a generalization—if these issues about the various contexts that define value
were teased out—if there would be less ‘fear’ when it comes to online screening. The default position
seems to be that online distribution and display are necessarily detrimental for artists working within the
traditional distribution model, without much accounting for the different types of contexts possible online.
It’s still—more than 10 years into it—the conversation nobody wants to have. Do you have thoughts on
this, as someone who works off and online?
NF: I’m still showing mostly off-line. For me it’s more a question of context than the value of an individual
work. I don’t think about videos as objects with intrinsic value, like the way paintings or sculptures have
traditionally been valued—in terms of scarcity or the uniqueness of art objects. I don’t think about the
value of a specific video—or about one video being more valuable than another, but I think the work artists do overall as a practice has value. There are certain contexts where I would show for free, rather than
certain works I would show for free. For example: certain educational contexts or small festival screenings
that are not funded. But this is tricky. When it comes to screening and exhibition fees the question remains—is there value to the work that artists do? Is it an economic value? If not, what kind of value is it and
how does this fit into existing structures? I’m not sure about the answers. Clearly most artists do not make
a living from screening fees and do other types of work to generate income. Like other types of research and
production (academic, technical, etc.), artists need time and resources. So the question of context is really
important to wayward.ca... is this how you would also frame it?
For wayward we have decided to launch a limited one-month online showcase in conjunction with a live
public discussion, with curator present. VIDEO CACHE is paralleled online but I don’t think we would say that
it is meant to duplicate or mirror the event. How would you describe it?
NF: As a parallel activity it’s more of an extension than a duplication. Plus it’s an exhibition rather than a
single screening. Hopefully it will also reach a wider audience, in addition to the people who were able to
attend the GIV screening. It also provides the possibility for people to review the work. In this case it also
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
MH: I think of wayward as an experiment, too. But if I had to say which kind of experiment, I would say that
for me—as a person really interested in technical elements of the web and their link to uses/possibilities—
it’s an experiment about conventions. Even if the web is ‘young,’ it has been around long enough to instate
itself into certain principles and discourses. For example, playing with ‘dynamic’ and ‘static’ is interesting,
as is the ‘material’ and ‘immaterial’ contrast—which is almost cliché in its most simplistic comparison.
reiterates the initial intended location for Mediatheque: the selected work was originally accumulated and
formatted for online viewing, so the videos were already thought of as working well in the online context.
MH: Making VIDEO CACHE into a one-month showcase is actually breaking the convention of the web, which
is for the most part, more of an ongoing and continual space, continually updated and archived. Rare are
the projects that showcase—intentionally—for short periods of time on the web. I find that kind of thing,
those conventions, interesting. And like you say, this becomes an experiment for ways of showing and also
preserving video, though ‘preserving’ in a different sense…
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
VIDEO CACHE
In terms of video history and archives, I think VIDEO CACHE definitely plays with ideas and ideals around
scarcity and value, which are pertinent to both. I think showing works from the now-defunct Mediatheque
(even if it’s due back up in 2011) serves the purpose of reviving the project and creating a document that
highlights the fact that it was the first large-scale video art repository of its kind. But it is also the very nature of the defunct archive that gives us an angle for this show—if the Mediatheque remained online, this
wouldn’t happen. I think looking at interruptions, breaks, and even failures is essential for understanding
the link between video art history and the era of online distribution and display.
It allows for many of the works—some of which are not distributed elsewhere—to be shown. Artists
represented by distributors often default to them to determine the conditions and contexts in which their
work should be shown, but these questions of online value remain largely unresolved even for distributors,
it seems. Is it ‘safer’ to opt to not show work online because of lack of control over circulation and downloading? Maybe... when the online realm is framed as a threat to the value of the work, which it often is,
despite little evidence to this effect.
One of the main questions I want to get at with VIDEO CACHE is how the entire notion of preservation is
thwarted in the digital online realm. But my thought is that preservation is really a central issue of this project. If you look up the etymology of “preservation”, it leads you to “self-preservation” (seventeeth-century)
and “conservation” and “protection” (eighteenth-century). I find that it says a lot about preservation as a
paradox—that you have to protect and keep intact—to access later. To me… online, we have to reconsider
this notion. I would go out on a limb and say that access itself could be preservation. Could be. I’m not saying it is, but I think it needs to be a bigger part of the discussion than it has been so far. I don’t think storage
and memory are the same thing, but I think access might be a memory trigger…
What pervades, either way, is that the online realm is forcing us to reconsider the foundational concept
of preservation within and beyond the archive. I think preservation is also really pertinent to the work
featured in VIDEO CACHE, especially if we consider how many works draw upon other works—found footage, mainstream media clips, collage and commentary on pop culture and so on. A lot of that work was
pre-internet, so it’s interesting to think about this in relation to video as an art practice that has a political
impetus. That the online realm makes file-sharing more easy and accessible is interesting to think about
within video art’s art historical trajectory, too… where does wayward fit into this?
NF: The idea that access in itself is a kind of preservation in terms of a collective conversation and memory
is very interesting. It makes me think about how you could try to work with collective memory as a site.
But also the whole question of memory has been altered by the amount, scale and speed of information
that’s available and that we all, to some extent, deal with. Our collective attention span tends to (or has
necessarily) become smaller. This is obvious in a way. You could argue that this just means we are able to
deal with and/or process more information faster. I have some doubts about this. I also wonder where experimental video art fits into this enormous data stream. I like the idea that everyone is or could be an artist
and that participation becomes more open. I’m still attached to different kinds of conversations, exchange
and experience, including online, but also in person, in groups, in a variety of venues.
Does more access mean preservation? Or does everything just become disposable? I also wonder who really
has (or even wants) access to what. Is doing everything online becoming a convention?
MH: I hear what you are saying about how time and speed pertain to framing preservation online…
I wonder if art and art institutions should be moving closer to the speed of everyday lived experience or
deliberately offering alternative experiences? I realize the idea that art is counter-culture is somehow over,
but it just seems so impoverishing to move everything in one direction: more/bigger/faster. We could
debate this, but I would even question if this is the best way to engage an audience in a museum context.
We can talk about open and free access in terms of exchange and conversation. Clearly online resources
are great tools. There is also an aspect that’s about consuming and discarding information at high speed.
This makes me wonder who is really going to look at and think about video art? I’m not sure about this, but
maybe the sheer amount of video available online in one way or another discourages viewers from spending
much time with anything in particular, especially anything ‘difficult.’
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
NF: Yes, this is interesting… there is no doubt that we have been changed by technology, including our perception of time… and probably space, for that matter. I see that artists and art institutions have responded
to this in some way. But the type of response could be to offer radically different possibilities for experience and interaction: for example stillness, silence or some kind of very slow and meditative experience.
This may seem a bit romantic, naïve even, and certainly not the only response, but I would say, still valid!
If you think about an hour-long video loop projected in a gallery, for example, many people will not have
the time or patience for this kind of interaction with a work. But is that a reason not to produce or show
something like this?
At the same time, this doesn’t detract from the incredible resources available online, particularly for research and education. In terms of presentation and creating a certain type of experience for viewers, I think
online platforms have limitations. For me, marginal is okay and I don’t have any illusions about being able
to speak to everyone. I’m interested in small audiences.
The whole question of memory is endlessly fascinating. Artists (I think) want to make things that people
remember and they also want to be part of the cultural conversation. Is something that you see once in a
particular place and time (an event or screening) with all of its associated sensory, embodied information,
going to be remembered differently than something you look at repeatedly online, possibly in a distracted
way? I don’t know the answer to this. I see that value based on scarcity or exclusivity is problematic, but
what’s the other side of this coin? Everything available all the time everywhere?
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
VIDEO CACHE
MH: I would counter this point and say it’s not about everything being available for free all the time as much
as it is about acknowledging the ‘many lives’ and contexts of video. What I mean is that in Canada, distributors and festivals tend to consider works new if they were produced in the last two years. Distributors also
hold high the value early works—from the 70s and 80s–often in deteriorating formats. So I think what the
online might offer is a place for works that fall in between. That’s one thing. The other thing is that sites like
UBU Web make available works that are rare and out of circulation, works that would never be accessed
otherwise or are so obscure that most people would not even know to search them out.
So in this way, I would argue that the online realm extends the notion of audience and has the potential to
include more people, to inspire more people. This doesn’t mean that marginal is not okay; in fact the web’s
kind of like a giant amalgam of marginal interests…
NF: I see what you mean. In the ways you describe here, I have to agree... in terms of research, archiving,
preservation and extending the audience.
There is no question that online screening increases access. Maybe for me the question is whether this is
always the best way of seeing work. If an artist spends months constructing a sound track–you want people
to be able to hear it on a real sound system. Or if you’re working with image processing in very particular
ways, you want the audience to be able to see the image correctly. But these can also be problems in live
screening contexts. One solution is having different versions of the same work for different screening situations.
MH: To me it seems like the more people have access to something, the better preserved it is, as it remains
part of a collective conversation: to be reassessed, remixed, deconstructed, intellectualized, critiqued, and
so on. But for sure ‘access’ is a problematic concept, too.
NF: This makes sense. Access keeps things alive in a way. For me file-sharing, collaboration and exchange
are where online video becomes really interesting. Thinking about wayward in this realm, our
SPLINTER project has really worked in terms of production, exchange, collaboration and even developing an extended sense of community. As a kind of video chain letter, it really relied upon file-sharing. We
started with one short video that you made. I responded to it. We put both online and drafted a series of
instructions to send out.
Interestingly, we also sent out data DVD copies with invitations by mail to specific artists whom we wanted
to participate. They were asked to make a video in response to my video, which drew from your video, and
to invite another artist to continue this chain. We encouraged people to respond in any way they liked, using the video they received by mail as a starting point. The response has been really interesting and inspiring. All the videos can be seen online, and there is also a plan to organize a live screening of those works
at some point, or to make a compilation video. For me SPLINTER is an example of how online exchange
can work in terms of collaboration, inspiration and extending your individual practice in new directions.
It’s interesting to think about projects like this and to think about how one idea/approach/image (in the
form of a video) is transformed through a series of other processes and points of view… what one person
takes from another and so on. I like the idea of setting something loose and observing what happens…
putting material out there not knowing exactly how it will be used or where it will end up. There are now
11 works on the site for SPLINTER and they really demonstrate how ideas circulate—what it means to be
inspired and to draw form other people’s work.
So video art online is just one venue…
My interest is also in how the online realm is almost always contrasted to the offline: the quality, experiential elements, viewing experience and so on. But I think we tend to forget that the white room/black
box experience that we now deem ideal in a lot of ways, wasn’t the original screening context either, if
such a thing exists. And especially not for video art… Into the 1930s, cinema-going involved a collective
and attentive spectatorship, but prior to this, the viewing experience was more like unruly Vaudeville and
popular entertainment forms. And early films were also often screened consecutively without effort to demarcate beginning or end. The emergence of video art in the 1960s created new practices of spectatorship
and exhibition protocols in galleries. For a period of time, video art appeared in marginal spaces within
galleries—unsure of how to conceive of video as art—tucked away in foyers and corridors, under the
stairs, etc. But it was only in the 1990s that a new default format was born—the white cube became a black
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
MH: I agree that online video art should just be seen as a venue—an alternative or option—and not a progression or replacement of offline screenings, for example.
box, with large ‘frameless’ projections onto dark enclosed gallery walls. The current viewing etiquette,
that largely carries over from cinema to the gallery space, demands respect for the works of art (generally)
through attention and silence.
NF: I’m interested in a variety of viewing experiences. Even with single channel video, a physical experience of viewing a projected image has always been important to me as an artist. Online is definitely interesting as one of several modes of presentation, but not as a replacement. Again I can see that it’s especially
useful (invaluable, even) as a research and educational tool and maybe also as an introduction to someone’s
work. As I think more about this, I’m remembering that for certain videos I picture one person as the audience. Usually I think of a gallery situation with a small screen and headphones for this type of work, but
viewing online with headphones would be another possibility for addressing one person at a time.
I’m interested especially in the physical/phenomenological possibilities of different modes of presentation.
I haven’t thought enough yet about how this works online but it could be interesting.
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
VIDEO CACHE
I’m not sure if etiquette is really the question: or even respect for the work. Isn’t it more a question of what
kind of experience you want to have as a viewer? And what constitutes “experience” and “interaction”?
I also really like more unruly, Vaudeville-type situations as one possibility and I can think of some examples
that have stayed with me. These experiences were interesting partly because the viewing etiquette was a
lot less formal, also because the venues were outside of usual gallery, museum or official cinema contexts,
and most importantly because the audiences were mostly non-art world and they engaged in different ways
with the artists and with the work. The questions and the conversations were different. One was a screening tour in Scotland. Another was Rendez-vous with Madness, a screening organized by Deirdre Logue at the
Queen Street Mental Health centre in Toronto. The other one that comes to mind was in a squat in Bielefeld, Germany. Very memorable experiences… which brings me back to the whole question of memory and
preservation, as well as experience and interaction.
I guess when anything becomes a convention it’s interesting to experiment with other possibilities.
I know that these questions are central to your doctoral research, as well as in your work as a video-maker.
As an academic but also as someone who makes things, how are you thinking about research and creation
and how does it relate to the VIDEO CACHE project?
MH: Thinking of what I do as research-creation is an approach that works for me now. There was a period
where I struggled with the term because I wasn’t sure what it meant, how it was applied, how it could
be assessed, and ultimately, I worried that it created a distinction between research and creative work,
Another Einstein quote I like: “In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.” I like
to think that there is an integral part of research that is practice-based by definition in research creation.
In the case of VIDEO CACHE, research creation has come to mean two things. One: collaboration enriches
research, and from a feminist purview, fits with the idea that a very substantial exchange with the community with whom you work is necessary as an acknowledgment of the shared contribution to that field of
knwoledge. Collaboration is a word that gets thrown around a lot, but in this case it is the key to producing
rich, detailed, and thorough research—nothing about this project is accessible without a personal investment and that means being personally accountable, responsible and involved at each stage of the project.
Often I think that this project chose me, or that we chose each other. VIDEO CACHE is a way to highlight the
extraordinary initiative from SAW Video in building the Mediatheque long before video was on the web,
and including their patient and engaged assessment of how such a project figures in the current technolandscape. These are difficult questions. The research creation component of research then, includes curating VIDEO CACHE, showcasing some of the videos of the Mediatheque, organizing a public event around it,
inviting artists and contributors and technicians for the project to attend and discuss, creating documentation through a catalogue such as this one and an online showcase for one month, and contextualising it all
with both published academic articles and documentary video footage. Secondly, research creation is about
an approach—if not a politic—for research. It means engaging in research while being highly reflexive
on process and, in turn, always reflecting on how knowledge is being produced… what gets highlighted
and–more importantly from a cultural Studies standpoint–what gets left out and what power relations are
revealed as a result. So to merge two answers into one, research creation allows me to position this project
as necessarily collaborative, self-reflexive, process-driven and producing documentation that falls outside
of the strictly written realm of academia. Finally, research creation is also focused on process rather than
identity; this appeals to me very much as someone who identifies neither as academic nor artist.
h
SAW Video | GIV | wayward.ca
rather than incorporating them to challenge certain foundational ideas about what constitutes legitimate
and “rigourous” research, and conversely, what doesn’t count. I see it differently now (in large part thanks
to Kim Sawchuk, Owen Chapman and Matt Soar at Concordia University), and it not only appeals to my
research politics and ethics, but it very much situates me as a particular kind of researcher. Together, as an
appraoch and philosophy, my work invaribly challenges the foundations of what constitutes knowledge and
‘knowledge production,’ as we like to call in in Comuminication Studies. I think it was Einstein who said
something to the effect that research is not about the answer but about the way the question is asked. I like
this idea of research requiring not only one’s positioning as a researcher within a specific process, and mode
of documentation and analysis, but also that this very process becomes the crux of research. Thought of in
that way, research is not about proving a hypothesis—it is far more experimental, complex and invested in
ideas about knowledge creation and the ‘iterativeness’ of it all.
VIDEO CACHE Curated by Penny McCann, SAW Video
VIDEO CACHE Sponsored and hosted by GIV
VIDEO CACHE Catalogue by Mél Hogan
VIDEO CACHE Online Exhibit by Mél Hogan
Wayward.ca by Mél Hogan & Nikki Forrest
SAW Dust video by Anatoly Ignatiev (online)
Mediatheque launch video by Firuz Daud for SAW Video (online)
Thank you to all the artists featured in VIDEO CACHE: Carol Beecher, Jake Hanna, Ryan Stec, Riley Rempel,
Dan Sokolowski, Chris Mullington, Tim Dallett, Phil Rose, Thomas McIntosh, Eric Walker, Tony Asimakopoulos, and Gunilla Josephson.
Thank you to Anatoly Ignatiev, Kevin Morris, Douglas Smalley, Michael Lechasseur, and Penny McCann
for feedback and insights in documenting the Mediatheque.
Thank you to Dayna McLeod for compressing video for web. Merci à Suzanne St Pierre et Claude Dionne
pour la correction des textes. Thank you to Tamara Shepherd for copy editing. Merci à Frédérick Belzile
pour le laptop lors de l’évènement au GIV. Thank you to Kim Sawchuk, Matt Soar, Owen Chapman and
Jules Pidduck for continued academic support. Merci à Nancy Tobin et m-c MacPhee pour le reste.
Thank you to the developers of Indexhibit and Stacey App for creating useful free content management
systems and applications.